The other day I (well, the AI) just wrote a Rust app to merge two (huge, GB of data) tables by discovering columns with data in common based on text distance (levenshtein and Dice) . It worked beautifully

An i have NEVER made one line of Rust.

I dont understand nay-sayers, to me the state of gen.AI is like the simpsons quote "worst day so far". Look were we are within 5 years of the first real GPT/LLM. The next 5 years are going to be crazy exciting.

The "programmer" position will become a "builder". When we've got LLMs that generate Opus quality text at 100x speed (think, ASIC based models) , things will get crazy.

▲

dannersy 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Because if you don't know the language or problem space, there are footguns in there that you can't find, you won't know what to look for to find them. Only until you try to actually use this in a production environment will the issues become evident. At that point, you'll have to either know how to read and diagnose the code, or keep prompting till you fix it, which may introduce another footgun that you didn't know that you didn't know.

This is what gets me. The tools can be powerful, but my job has become a thankless effort in pointing out people's ignorance. Time and again, people prompt something in a language or problem space they don't understand, it "works" and then it hits a snag because the AI just muddled over a very important detail, and then we're back to the drawing board because that snag turned out to be an architectural blunder that didn't scale past "it worked in my very controlled, perfect circumstances, test run." It is getting really frustrating seeing this happen on repeat and instead of people realizing they need to get their hands dirty, they just keep prompting more and more slop, making my job more tedious. I am basically at the point where I'm looking for new avenues for work. I say let the industry just run rampant with these tools. I suspect I'll be getting a lot of job offers a few years from now as everything falls apart and their $10k a day prompting fixed one bug to cause multiple regressions elsewhere. I hope you're all keeping your skills sharp for the energy crisis.

	▲	psyklic 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Before LLMs, I've watched in horror as colleagues immediately copy-paste-ran Stack Overflow solutions in terminal, without even reading them. LLM agents are basically the same, except now everyone is doing it. They copy-paste-run lots of code without meaningfully reviewing it. My fear is that some colleagues are getting more skilled at prompting but less skilled at coding and writing. And the prompting skills may not generalize much outside of certain LLMs.

▲

npinsker 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Human minds are built to find patterns, and you should be careful not to assume the rate of improvement will continue forever based on nothing but a pattern.

▲

throwawaytea 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Just the fact that even retail quality hardware is still improving at local LLM significantly is still a great sign. If AI quality remained the same, and the cost for local hardware dropped to $1000, it would still be the greatest thing since the internet IMO. So even if the worst happens and all progress stops, I'm still very happy with what we got.

▲

leptons 7 hours ago | parent [-]

>I'm still very happy with what we got

"One person's slop is another person's treasure"

I'm not all that impressed with "AI". I often "race" the AI by giving it a task to do, and then I start coding my own solution in parallel. I often beat the AI, or deliver a better result.

Artificial Intelligence is like artificial flavoring. It's cheap and tastes passable to most people, but real flavors are far better in every way even if it costs more.

	▲	LadyCailin an hour ago \| parent [-]
		At their current stage, this feels like the wrong way to use them. I use them fully supervised, (despite the fact that feels like I’m fighting the tools), which is kind of the best of both worlds. I review every line of code before I allow the edit, and if something is wrong, I tell it to fix it. It learns over time, especially as I set rules in memories, and so the process has sped up, to the point that this goes way faster than if I would have done that myself. Not all tasks are appropriate for LLMs at all, but when they are, this supervised mode is quite fast, and I don’t believe the output to be slop, but anyways I feel like I own every line of code still.

▲

fauchletenerum 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The overall trend in AI performance will still be up and to the right like everything else in computing over the past 50 years, improvement doesn't have to be linear

	▲	swingboy 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Assuming newer, more efficient architectures are discovered.

▲

fastforwardius 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I seem to remember doing it in SQL (EDIT_DISTANCE) 20ish years ago. While I wouldn't say it worked beautifully, I also didn't need to make a single line of Rust :) also no more than 2 line s of SQL were needed.

	▲	jqbd 20 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		And how many years of experience you needed to know what to write, and what if you can replace that time with how long prompting takes?

▲

8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

sjeiuhvdiidi 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Let me explain the naysayers, they know "programmer" has always meant "builder" and just because search is better and you can copy and paste faster doesn't mean you've built anything.First thing people need to realize is no proprietary code is in those databases, and using Ai will ultimately just get you regurgitated things people don't really care about. Use it all you want, you won't be able to do anything interesting, they aren't giving you valuable things for free. Anything of value will still take time and knowledge. The marketing hype is to reduce wages and prevent competition. Go for it.